daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old January 17th, 2009, 01:59 AM   #341
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

isn't it a case that when we had too much capacity we saw it as such, rather than looking at what the future might hold... new travel patterns, and the likelihood that the car whilst being important won't be the be all and end all...

Wouldn't it be better to over provide than to under provide... therefore if HS1 is gonna go all the way to Glasgow let it...
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 17th, 2009, 09:07 AM   #342
hans280
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 173

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
We need a new line between London and Birmingham as a pressing concern (others could do with more capacity from new tracks, but aren't really necessary), or a 4-tracked Chiltern ML and a Birmingham avoiding route from that line to serve the North West. We might as well build an HSL, because it's not much more expensive and makes us not look backwards.

We don't need a new line as far as Manchester/Liverpool - one would be good, but it's not needed - sort out a Stafford bypass (a couple of miles of track near Stone) and you solve the biggest problem north of Birmingham.
Yeah, but the point I was making is that the traffic forecasts that I have seen quoted (yes, quoted, in the British press online, so it is of course third-hand knowledge...) by 2020/25 the railway triangle Birmingham/Liverpool/Manchester WILL be saturated. Seeing as it takes around 10 years to build a railway line (including planning, etc.) this means it's about time to get started.
hans280 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2009, 05:21 PM   #343
sarflonlad
Registered User
 
sarflonlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,086
Likes (Received): 68

All this discussion about what qualifies as HSR in the UK.

Certainly, 200kph in the UK might be the "top speed" on "classic" lines - but unlike HSR in other countries which is promoted at 300kph - the average speed between UK WCML/ECML/GWML and France TGV / Germany ICE is probably a lot closer than you think when you look at journey times.

If the UK pulls off new HSR routes along the West Coast - well, we'll be envied the world over on that corridor. 200kph "commuter lines" with stopping next to 300kph+ city-2-city HS Lines.
sarflonlad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2009, 08:57 PM   #344
hans280
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 173

C'mon, sarfonlad, methinks you really should be a bit more modest. I too sometimes defend the practices of my native Denmark as being "good enough" - in fact nigh optimal given the local conditions. I'll also grant you that EFFECTIVE speeds on HSLs are often a far cry below the widely trumpteted Vmax. That said...

...the UK is nowhere near being envied the world over. The railway line between Paris and Marseille is around 730 km long. The one between London and Glasgow is approximately 660 km long. Hence, any "reasonable person" (a standard established by English common law) would expect the travel times London-Glasgow to be signficiantly below those on Paris-Marseille. As it is the latter takes around three hours whereas the best travel time between Glasgow and the capital is 4h35. It doesn't help, of course, that the train between London and Glasgow stops 7 times, including such metropolises as Preston, whereas Paris-Marseille roars past Lyon (a provincial town with only 3.5 million inhabitants...) at 300 km/h And incidentally...

...you're aiming for a moving (!) target: SNCF has already made it clear that it considers 300 km/h as yesterday's HS concept. New lines shall in France shall be serviced at 360 km/h.
hans280 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2009, 11:36 AM   #345
sarflonlad
Registered User
 
sarflonlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,086
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by hans280 View Post
C'mon, sarfonlad, methinks you really should be a bit more modest.

...the UK is nowhere near being envied the world over.
Ermmm... yes... that's why I said, IF, we pull off the new HSR line - then THAT corridor would be envied.

Quote:
The railway line between Paris and Marseille is around 730 km long. The one between London and Glasgow is approximately 660 km long. Hence, any "reasonable person" (a standard established by English common law) would expect the travel times London-Glasgow to be signficiantly below those on Paris-Marseille. As it is the latter takes around three hours whereas the best travel time between Glasgow and the capital is 4h35. It doesn't help, of course, that the train between London and Glasgow stops 7 times, including such metropolises as Preston, whereas Paris-Marseille roars past Lyon (a provincial town with only 3.5 million inhabitants...) at 300 km/h And incidentally...

...you're aiming for a moving (!) target: SNCF has already made it clear that it considers 300 km/h as yesterday's HS concept. New lines shall in France shall be serviced at 360 km/h.
On routes such as London - Manchester non stop - that's pretty competitive. And what's more, people don't really call the 125mph on this route "high speed" - just "fast". Even with EU guidelines saying it qualifies as HSR - it's not aggressively promoted as such.

The UK knocks itself a lot for its railways (but the British are only happy when they're not moaning). 140mph+ runs have been proven capable with the old age technology we have. Capacity is the problem that truly slows everything down. This can be easily remedied with incab signaling... although I don't know the story behind that one or when it will get implemented.

If dedicated HS lines are built, then we can still run "fast" speeds on classic lines. We already run more route length of 100mph trains than any other EU country. Regional trains in France and Germany are arguably BAD in comparison to the UK. I honestly believe we're in a position to be envied with speed if the government pulls it finger out and builds HSR.
sarflonlad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2009, 12:40 PM   #346
Manchester Planner
Chief Bureaucrat
 
Manchester Planner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,831
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by hans280 View Post
New lines shall in France shall be serviced at 360 km/h.
France is a much bigger country (area/distances wise) than Great Britain - essentially an extra 60kph will be more beneficial to French travellers than to British travellers. A balance needs to be struck between paying for ever higher and higher linespeeds and the cost:benefit of doing so. In Britain, where the distances are rather less than in Germany, Spain or France, 300kph is really fast enough.

France is well ahead in HSR terms, but far too many people on these forums only think about the few HSR lines. The majority of people who use the railways across the world use the commuter lines, the slower/shorter inter-city lines, the rural lines, etc. The British network, despite the huge cuts made in the 50s-70s, is still nice and dense. What I'm trying to say is that the British network is far more complex and much more than just a couple of HSR/inter-city lines, with the vast majority using the railways for commuting relatively short distances (up to 50km or so). In the last 10 years the network has been improved to improve capacity (there's still a long way to go) rather than build new capacity (ie new lines). New lines will be built (and closed lines are re-opening here and there at the moment) but the present priority is still to get the existing, well-used (over-used!) network up to scratch and to full capability.

As I said, France is ahead of Britain in HSR terms, but I wonder what the average speeds are of local/regional French trains compared with their British equivalents? Many British local/regional lines have surprisingly high linespeeds (and fast diesel trains to run on them) - usually 90-110 mph (~ 165kph). I have a feeling that some countries (not necessarily France - hence why I am asking) are leaving aside local/regional routes to concentrate on fancy high speed stuff. Which is great in one respect, but a healthy network of local/regional routes is essential. It's all very well joining up a couple of cities with an expensive, high speed line, but what about the rest of the country or within the cities?

Right, anyway - the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) extension to Woolwich Arsenal has been completed...

http://pressroom.dlr.co.uk/news/details.asp?id=189

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ianvisi...57612348570251

...ahead of schedule and within its budget!

Last edited by Manchester Planner; January 18th, 2009 at 12:50 PM.
Manchester Planner no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2009, 12:48 PM   #347
Manchester Planner
Chief Bureaucrat
 
Manchester Planner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,831
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarflonlad View Post
140mph+ runs have been proven capable...
And of course happen on the East Coast Mainline. The West Coast Mainline could get up to 140mph with the correct signalling.

The new lines being discussed for Britain are being discussed not really because the old mainlines are not fast enough (what really is the difference between 140 and 186 mph when travelling London-Manchester... 15 minutes?) but because of building new capacity when, in 15-20 years, the existing mainlines will be at bursting point.

And no, the east and west coast mainlines are never described as being high speed... just "fast" as sarfonlad says.
Manchester Planner no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2009, 01:18 PM   #348
hans280
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 173

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manchester Planner
France is a much bigger country (area/distances wise) than Great Britain - essentially an extra 60kph will be more beneficial to French travellers than to British travellers. A balance needs to be struck between paying for ever higher and higher linespeeds and the cost:benefit of doing so. In Britain, where the distances are rather less than in Germany, Spain or France, 300kph is really fast enough.
Oh, in France as well. Or, I'd say the new line(s) where TGV Reseaux now run 320 km/h and which could be sped up later are more than sufficient. The only reason they've begun to speak of 360 km/h is because it's a way of excluding Siemens's Velaro from competing with Alstom's new AGV.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manchester Planner
France is well ahead in HSR terms, but far too many people on these forums only think about the few HSR lines. The majority of people who use the railways across the world use the commuter lines, the slower/shorter inter-city lines, the rural lines, etc. The British network, despite the huge cuts made in the 50s-70s, is still nice and dense.
I wouldn't oversell that argument, Manchester. People often argue against HSLs saying that "OMG, then something should first be done about the crappy commuter lines around Birmingham/Lyon/Frankfurt/whatever - that's where 80% of the train passengers are". By similar logics we should never have built one inch of motorways in Western Europe: your average street in downtown Marseille carries more cars per day than the Autoroute between Paris and Lyon. Local transport and inter-regional transport are very different animals and if one neglects one then one cannot very well redeem oneself by harping on the excellence of the other. And speaking of which...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manchester Planner
I have a feeling that some countries (not necessarily France - hence why I am asking) are leaving aside local/regional routes to concentrate on fancy high speed stuff. Which is great in one respect, but a healthy network of local/regional routes is essential. It's all very well joining up a couple of cities with an expensive, high speed line, but what about the rest of the country or within the cities?
Your feeling is correct. France has not had particularly high railway investments (per head or per GDP) relative to other western countries, so the development of the LGV network has come at a cost to other lines. This has, however, to some extent been intentional: the French government is much more laissez-faire toward the current trend toward a de-population of certain regions than most European policy makers. They respond by knocking down secondary lines or leaving them to rot. It all appears to be part of a "grand vision" according to which almost all French people in 50 years will live in 15-20 agglomerations. Therefore, the priority is to connect these agglomerations with very fast trains and provide each of them with a proper local infrastructure. In keeping with this, towns that would until very recently have been considered too small for such follies are now investing in expensive metros. One example is Rennes - which really only makes sense if they assume that much of Brittany's population will gravitate to the regional capital. However...

...one casulalty of this policy has been the local infrastructure in the larger Paris area. The suburban train network (the RERs, not to be confused with commuter lines) that were the pride of the nation one generation ago are now cracking badly. There's the mother and father of stinks about this in the French press these days.
hans280 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2009, 02:16 PM   #349
JoKo65
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,111
Likes (Received): 86

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoFMO View Post
200km/h is not considered high speed. High speed railwaying starts with 250km/h.
[…]
Who says that?
In Germany it starts with 160 km/h + (SFS [Schnellfahrstrecken]).
__________________
L'Amerique? C'est l'évolution de la barbarie à la décadence, sans toucher la culture.
JoKo65 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2009, 02:41 PM   #350
hans280
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 757
Likes (Received): 173

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoKo65 View Post
Who says that?
In Germany it starts with 160 km/h + (SFS [Schnellfahrstrecken]).
He follows the European Commission's definition. (For projects that they consider as high speed and hence are willing to support.) As for the German "definition" what you have there is the limit for conventional signaling equipment. If you what to drive faster than 160 km/h on a conventional line then you need to invest massively in electronics. - It is for this reason that virtually no lines are laid out for a Vmax 180 km/h. It only makes sense to go above 160 km/h if you go some way above it.
hans280 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 19th, 2009, 12:15 AM   #351
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Quote:
Originally Posted by hans280 View Post
I wouldn't oversell that argument, Manchester. People often argue against HSLs saying that "OMG, then something should first be done about the crappy commuter lines around Birmingham/Lyon/Frankfurt/whatever - that's where 80% of the train passengers are". By similar logics we should never have built one inch of motorways in Western Europe: your average street in downtown Marseille carries more cars per day than the Autoroute between Paris and Lyon.
Tolled motorways are empty - French motorways are really quiet compared to English ones. I can't think of many roads that are unimproved and carry traffic levels equivalent to motorways - there's a B road in Surrey with about 30kvpd - about equal to the quietest motorways, but that's all I can think of. There's A roads with more, but they tend to be dual carriageway or even expressway.

Also I think there's a problem you haven't realised here - 80% of traffic uses the more-minor routes, but there are more more-minor routes. Per mile the motorway network carries a lot more traffic than other roads (at least in the UK), overall they don't.

The biggest beneficiaries, in the UK, of an HSL from London to Manchester are places not on the line, but on the old line, like Stafford, Milton Keynes and Northampton - they'll get more, and maybe even faster, trains to the regional centres/London. While London-Birmingham, London-Manchester and Birmingham-Manchester journeys are important, and carry a sizable number of people, the slightly larger number of people who commute to London/Birmingham/Manchester by train is more and the extra trains are a bigger benefit than a small amount of time saved.
sotonsi está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 05:30 AM   #352
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by hans280 View Post
He follows the European Commission's definition. (For projects that they consider as high speed and hence are willing to support.) As for the German "definition" what you have there is the limit for conventional signaling equipment. If you what to drive faster than 160 km/h on a conventional line then you need to invest massively in electronics. - It is for this reason that virtually no lines are laid out for a Vmax 180 km/h. It only makes sense to go above 160 km/h if you go some way above it.
No ... he (JoKo65) is correct.

EU definition of HSR is ... "upgraded" tracks at or above 200km/h ... "new" built tracks at or above 250km/h

Any old alignement upgraded to 200km/h (or even to a lower speed if some constraints exist) is considered as HSR to the EU commission.

People here should be counting all the british , italian , spanish , french (and others) 200km/h capable tracks as HSR ...

Usually in Europe (western) we have a technical gap at 140/160km/h ... that's where we diverge from "conventional" to "high speed" rail in reality.

140/160 or less = anything goes

16/ or more = if it costs the same (in terms os signaling and infraestructure) why dont push the "envelope" to its full capacity ??? and thus ... if able to go higher than 160 ... better double it to 320 if you can (Same cost).

Some places like the UK and spain have that same GAP as high as 200km/h(125mph) due to their "old" and "ageing" signaling sistems (no ATP in UK , ASFA in Spain , etc etc)
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 05:48 AM   #353
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
Tolled motorways are empty - French motorways are really quiet compared to English ones. I can't think of many roads that are unimproved and carry traffic levels equivalent to motorways - there's a B road in Surrey with about 30kvpd - about equal to the quietest motorways, but that's all I can think of. There's A roads with more, but they tend to be dual carriageway or even expressway.

Also I think there's a problem you haven't realised here - 80% of traffic uses the more-minor routes, but there are more more-minor routes. Per mile the motorway network carries a lot more traffic than other roads (at least in the UK), overall they don't.

The biggest beneficiaries, in the UK, of an HSL from London to Manchester are places not on the line, but on the old line, like Stafford, Milton Keynes and Northampton - they'll get more, and maybe even faster, trains to the regional centres/London. While London-Birmingham, London-Manchester and Birmingham-Manchester journeys are important, and carry a sizable number of people, the slightly larger number of people who commute to London/Birmingham/Manchester by train is more and the extra trains are a bigger benefit than a small amount of time saved.

Just like I said earlier (was it here or was it on another tread?) ... theres NO "need" for dedicated HSR in the UK/England ... theres a HUGE "need"for express-tracks on the current corridors ... a slight/small but important difference.

Just consider each and every MAIN "corridor" that doesn't have (at least) 4 tracks (2 express + 2 slow) as lacking in that department ...

York-London = 280km
Liverpool/Manchester-London = 290km
Birmingham-London = 150km

If only one of these corridors wasn't full of intermediate medium/large cities to be served one could consider a "true HSL" over there ... but the "intercity" network is already well developed ... just need some more tracks here and there.

On the other hand ... Glasgow/Edimburg-South would greatly benefit from a "true" HSL boost ... maiby a 300km Motherwell-Carlisle-Leeds-Doncaster upgrade of current alignements to 300km/h ???

On the other hand ... doing the Settle-Carlisle at 140mph would be awesome.
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 06:00 AM   #354
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by hans280 View Post
Sotavento, a couple of points. First, you are a bit imprecise in saying that the EU considers 200 km/h on old routes as HS. The relevant directive is about qualifying for maximum support under the Trans-European Networks programme and hence relates to the act of building/upgrading lines. Here, 250 km/h is automatically considered as HS, whereas upgradings of existing lines to 200 km/h MAY be considered as such.

Secondly, you're of course right to say the main challenge for faster intercity connections in the UK are the bottlenecks around a handful of major cities/junctions - chiefly London and Birmingham. However, it is not clear how one can remedy this without digging a big purse out of one's pocket: I remember the old Eurostar rides, going out of Gare du Nord (old tracks) with eight parallel tracks for the first 10-15 km, arriving at Waterloo station one one of the two (?) measly tracks running through Brixton. This has convinced me that you don't just snap your fingers and make the congestion of the commuter tracks disappear. MASSIVE investment is called for. Add to this the fact that in 1-2 decades there is also, on current trends, going to be saturation of several main lines. This adds up, IMHO, to one unavoidable conclusion: we need a new line between London and Manchester/Liverpool. Which being so, it might as well be tip-top modern, which means... European highspeed standard.
First ... HSR at 200km/h is there if any HST service runs over it.

As an example (and here italian railfans will kill me) ... the ETR500 seemed uncapable of running at "more than" 240km/h in the directissima ... why is it considered as an HS train ??? because it's "service" is considered High Speed ... go figure.

High Speed Rail is a composition of 3 factors ... a) infraestructure , b) train , c) service ... if 2 conditions are met and the 3rd only fails marginaly it is still ocnsidered HSR.

Hense the 200km/h being HSR ... if and only if a HS Service is run over them ...


Second ... Beeching effect ... the UK is in the "singular" position in wich it has old line alignements to spare ... there is not a REAL "need" to create new railways ... just a need to upgrade line speeds and in some cases build more lines along existing ones or even reopen some stretches of closed railways.

Birmingham seems an easy case to me ... there are plenty of closed embankments in the general direction of londinium ... and Londinium itself is another clear case of why don't they optimize the more than plenty railways radiating out of the city ???


THIRD ... you base your conclusions on 2 premises ... a) there is a need for change and b) current infraestructure doesn't work.

Consider this ... except on localided spots the MAIN lines in the UK are basically long stretches of STRAIGHT tracks ... if you have enough (say quadruplication) there is nothing stoping Network Rail from putting 2 out of 4 able for 200mph ... just a need to "optimize" track layouts (and even building some flyover/bypasses for local trains) and IMPLEMENT block signaling that permits speeds above the current 125/140mph limits (and here is where the UK in general falls behind).

The WCML and ECML (the general "corridors" and not the tracks themselves) are perfectly capable of handling 140km/h trains currently without much effort ... some sections of track need further linespeed improvement ... some other sections should be outright quadrupled ... and even in some cases some other sections should be built from scratch as true HSR in a more direct alignement ... but nonetheless they are as good as we can get over there.


And a general lack os passing-places in the main lines is amendable with little investment ...
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça

Last edited by sotavento; January 22nd, 2009 at 06:14 AM.
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 07:24 AM   #355
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
The Victoria-Chatham 'main line' has 4 tracks, just that at just north of Brixton, they diverge and take different routes to Shortlands.

It's worth pointing out that the line isn't a long distance one - OK, you'll have trains to Ramsgate and Ashford on it, but most are suburban. Eurostar used it as they couldn't go to London Bridge (the first zone 1 station on the mainline from Dover) due to congestion and no site for a terminus. Waterloo had space, and the Chatham lines had capacity in London. The whole thing was a complete bodge.

I'm struggling to think of a major main line out of London with less than 4 tracks to the edge of London. I guess there's the Chiltern, though that doesn't have much suburban traffic inside London, but is mostly suburban traffic outside London. Often it's the case that instead of 4 tracking (or 6 tracking) an alternate route is built, serving other places - Dartford has 3 main routes for instance.

It seems that you saw the worst of UK rail and extrapolated to all the far more major routes.

We need a new line between London and Birmingham as a pressing concern (others could do with more capacity from new tracks, but aren't really necessary), or a 4-tracked Chiltern ML and a Birmingham avoiding route from that line to serve the North West. We might as well build an HSL, because it's not much more expensive and makes us not look backwards.

We don't need a new line as far as Manchester/Liverpool - one would be good, but it's not needed - sort out a Stafford bypass (a couple of miles of track near Stone) and you solve the biggest problem north of Birmingham.
Manchester-London

Manchester-Stokport-Crewe = 48km
= 4 tracks ... then out os stokport they just cut short to 2 tracks (out of nowhere from 4 to 2) ... same in the Crewe side
- the "intermediate" 20km are easily upgradeable to 4 tracks (2 slow + 2 fast) ... in fact the only problematic section seems to be around the station of Alderley Edge ... just get rid of the station itself (just relocate) and grab the platform space to add extra rails.

Crewe-Stafford = 40km ... 4 tracks

Stafford-LittleHaywood = 8km ... 4 track then a tunnel with 2 tracks <<< one of the operational bottlenecks of the WCML ???
- just build a slow/fast track around the hill (1200m long at most)

L.Haywood-Nuneaton-Rugby =66km ... 4 (or 5?) tracks
- upgrade to 2 fast (140mph?) + 2 slow (or even 4 fast?)

Rugby-goodyersEnd-Coleshill-CastleBromwich = 28km <<< namely the M6 corridor ...
- the easiest aproach for a new HSL/route to Birmingham.
- maiby even a "spur" to BMI somewhere along the way???


Stafford-Wolverhampton = 22km ... 2 tracks ...
- 18km on countriside (quadruplication?)
- inside wolverhampton itself there is place for capacity increase (theres even a 3 track bridge with only 2 tracks )

Wolverhampton-Birmingham = 3 double track routes (one is used by local "metro"?)

Manchester-Maclesfield-Kidsgrove = 45km ... 2 tracks ... 1 siding at Maclesfield
= where to put more space ??? just add sidings along the route
= Kidsgrove is a "joke" as a echange station ... 2+2 tracks along the mains ???

Kudsgrove-Stoke = 10km of unimpressive tracksge ... why is there no advanced sitching (or even a flyover) and no quadruplication there ???

Stoke-Stafford and Stoke-L.Haywood = ... better stick with track improvements and track addition.

There's a lot of room to improvements on the current routes ... a couple of new tracks here and there and capacity more than doubles (a dedicated pair of mains at 140mph all the way from London to Manchester for example = 12/20 express trains each way per hour)
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 07:30 AM   #356
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
isn't it a case that when we had too much capacity we saw it as such, rather than looking at what the future might hold... new travel patterns, and the likelihood that the car whilst being important won't be the be all and end all...

Wouldn't it be better to over provide than to under provide... therefore if HS1 is gonna go all the way to Glasgow let it...
You do understand thar the so called HS1 is ine of the routes in the UK wich actually has LESS capacity ??? you understand that don't you ???

HS1 = 2 tracks while most of british main lines = 4 track.

Also consider that the faster trains pass the smaller the total number of trains that you can put in a railway.

If the HS1 is to serve as an example to connections north of london start to reserve route numbers from HS2 to HS9 just for starters (just thinking about linking to major cities nearby).
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 07:32 AM   #357
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by hans280 View Post
C'mon, sarfonlad, methinks you really should be a bit more modest. I too sometimes defend the practices of my native Denmark as being "good enough" - in fact nigh optimal given the local conditions. I'll also grant you that EFFECTIVE speeds on HSLs are often a far cry below the widely trumpteted Vmax. That said...

...the UK is nowhere near being envied the world over. The railway line between Paris and Marseille is around 730 km long. The one between London and Glasgow is approximately 660 km long. Hence, any "reasonable person" (a standard established by English common law) would expect the travel times London-Glasgow to be signficiantly below those on Paris-Marseille. As it is the latter takes around three hours whereas the best travel time between Glasgow and the capital is 4h35. It doesn't help, of course, that the train between London and Glasgow stops 7 times, including such metropolises as Preston, whereas Paris-Marseille roars past Lyon (a provincial town with only 3.5 million inhabitants...) at 300 km/h And incidentally...

...you're aiming for a moving (!) target: SNCF has already made it clear that it considers 300 km/h as yesterday's HS concept. New lines shall in France shall be serviced at 360 km/h.
Hes got every right to not being so modest


the UK is one of the only places on earth where you get 200km/h "intercity" comuter trains at 20 minutes intervals to everywhere ...

New lines in portugal are prepared for "as much as the train can go" ... or as we say in technical terms ... it's a straight line from here to the border ... so let the spanish deal with stopping the trains on their side.

Routes in completely flat and plain terrein being planed for some "unimpressive" 350km/h ... we are so un-ambitious here ... specially if they put some AGV (360km/h) on them .
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça

Last edited by sotavento; January 22nd, 2009 at 07:47 AM.
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 07:44 AM   #358
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarflonlad View Post
Ermmm... yes... that's why I said, IF, we pull off the new HSR line - then THAT corridor would be envied.



On routes such as London - Manchester non stop - that's pretty competitive. And what's more, people don't really call the 125mph on this route "high speed" - just "fast". Even with EU guidelines saying it qualifies as HSR - it's not aggressively promoted as such.

The UK knocks itself a lot for its railways (but the British are only happy when they're not moaning). 140mph+ runs have been proven capable with the old age technology we have. Capacity is the problem that truly slows everything down. This can be easily remedied with incab signaling... although I don't know the story behind that one or when it will get implemented.

If dedicated HS lines are built, then we can still run "fast" speeds on classic lines. We already run more route length of 100mph trains than any other EU country. Regional trains in France and Germany are arguably BAD in comparison to the UK. I honestly believe we're in a position to be envied with speed if the government pulls it finger out and builds HSR.
Astonishingly the old HST trainsets have HS written all over them.

Special notice to hans280:

One thing people always neglect when free-bashing , trowing stones at others , braging louldly and other such offensive opinion making is that in the internet ares things are easily verifiable and rebutable.


London Lyon =

1 - NO INTERMEDIATE city/town/village whatsoever deserving mentioning
2- LyonTGV ... also known as Lyon Santolas AIRPORTO ... 15km out of central Lyon
3- Lyon is 415km away from paris ... and as I said previously ... nothing in between worthy of serving (at least acording to French methods/priorities)
4- add the route to Marseille and you have in some 700km of railway 2 cities served by rail ... Paris and Marseille ... the rest are either served by a remotely "villageAV" station or a turtuous 150vDC(?) classic route that happens to be close by.


London-Birmingham =

1- a lot of intermediate stops available
2- 3 different routes available
3- as low as 3/5 minutes between trains (if all routes were counted as one) are considered a "sufferable" and "poor" service nowadays ...




Of course Paris-Lyon and London-Birmingham (or any other intercity connection in the UK) are comparable ... NOT!

France is paris ... the rest is province ... not the same "treatment" in the UK
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 10:15 AM   #359
taikoo.city
ぴったん,ラーラーもじぴったん~~
 
taikoo.city's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: British Crown Colony of Hong Kong
Posts: 182
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotavento View Post
You do understand thar the so called HS1 is ine of the routes in the UK wich actually has LESS capacity ??? you understand that don't you ???

HS1 = 2 tracks while most of british main lines = 4 track.

Also consider that the faster trains pass the smaller the total number of trains that you can put in a railway.

If the HS1 is to serve as an example to connections north of london start to reserve route numbers from HS2 to HS9 just for starters (just thinking about linking to major cities nearby).
Not exactly. You can't just count the no. of tracks and speed for capacity. Sure HS1 can only run a maximum 10 mins headway due to slow acceleration/deceleration of TGV/Eurostar trains, but the signalling system (TVM430) should be able to handle shorter headway with appropriate trains (eg. AGV). Also the Japanese D-ATC/DS-ATC signalling on Shinkansen enables trains to run at 270~300km/h with down to 3 mins headway.
__________________
Sorry for being so political. If you think my comments are over the top, please leave me a kind reminder, thank you very much!

> Hong Kong is still part of the United Kingdom!! Please help BN(O)s to get what they deserve~~

> MTR North Island Line Discussion Thread
taikoo.city no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2009, 01:14 PM   #360
Manchester Planner
Chief Bureaucrat
 
Manchester Planner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,831
Likes (Received): 4

*yawn*
Manchester Planner no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
rail, railways

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium